how does zen differ from theravada?
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:12 am
how does zen differ from theravada?
aside from the obvious "north/south" buddhism. how do the approaches to enlightenment and meditation differ? are there more intent focuses? thank you
- mettafuture
- Posts: 475
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:13 pm
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
I found Zen to be frustratingly abstract. It doesn't depend as much on "words" like other Buddhist traditions; for me this quality made it more difficult to understand. I've dabbled with many philosophies and religions over the years, and I've yet to find anything as clear, systematic and practical as Theravada. Daoism, which could be consider the mother of Zen, comes close in its practicality, but putting it into practice isn't as straight forward.
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Some previous discussions:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=13382" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4458" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10871" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mike
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=13382" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=929" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4458" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=10871" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mike
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Zen is unbearable "open minded" (to borrow this term from another thread and suggest it as an alternative characterization, neither meant to be "positive" nor "negative"). Even difficult to find Zen followers that can cope with this.mettafuture wrote:I found Zen to be frustratingly abstract. ...
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
zen being influenced heavily by chinese and then japanese mind sets which themselves were largely influenced by taoism, confucianism and shintoism respectively is largely naturalistic and practical in nature. it relies heavily on concepts such as oneness with nature or the universe, actualizing "the way" (in essence, this is rarely said outright) which is largely similar to taoism. meditation is usually just letting the mind be, which is supposed to lead one to nirvana which is an unconditioned, natural state.
theravada is more influenced by indian mindsets from it's time of inception which are more meticulous and specific in practice and teaching. they use lists and numerical progressions and clearly laid out and defined step by step meditation procedures and so on. as opposed to silent illumiation and shikantaza are both methods in which progressive mind state teaching is not given.
it is very similar to vipassana in it's focus on mindfulness and non jhana sitting meditation, however unlike vipassana it does not use much contemplation. everything is thoughtless and without much direction. by thoughtless i mean one is usually not taught to contemplate not self, death and what not. one is just taught to sit. either literally just sit with no guidance or just sit with the breath. by direction i mean there is no listing of progressive states one can achieve such as the theravada stages of purification or the jhana progression. the only time one is taught to work with thoughts as contemplation is for koan study.
they teach from a few mahayana sutras such as the lankavatara sutra, heart sutra and lotus sutra among others while theravada uses the entire pali canon. the mahayana sutras are so massive and varied that one school rarely proclaims and uses all sutras within it as this would cause a lot of confusion and conflict. for example the pure land school sutras talk about how one can go to amitabha's pure land after death and reach enlightenment there by having faith in him, whereas other mahayana sutras talk more about self effort and direct practice to get oneself to nirvana in this life as opposed to the next or some kind of pure land, the lotus sutra proclaims itself the ultimate and highest sutra and so on. if you tried to practice all the mahayana sutras teachings you would end up in hundreds of knots. the pali canon is more or less internally consistent.
i do not know of a single practice found in zen, aside from koan, that is not found in theravada (and some would argue that there are things similar to koan in theravada as well). however there are many practices found in theravada that are not found in zen.
theravada is more influenced by indian mindsets from it's time of inception which are more meticulous and specific in practice and teaching. they use lists and numerical progressions and clearly laid out and defined step by step meditation procedures and so on. as opposed to silent illumiation and shikantaza are both methods in which progressive mind state teaching is not given.
it is very similar to vipassana in it's focus on mindfulness and non jhana sitting meditation, however unlike vipassana it does not use much contemplation. everything is thoughtless and without much direction. by thoughtless i mean one is usually not taught to contemplate not self, death and what not. one is just taught to sit. either literally just sit with no guidance or just sit with the breath. by direction i mean there is no listing of progressive states one can achieve such as the theravada stages of purification or the jhana progression. the only time one is taught to work with thoughts as contemplation is for koan study.
they teach from a few mahayana sutras such as the lankavatara sutra, heart sutra and lotus sutra among others while theravada uses the entire pali canon. the mahayana sutras are so massive and varied that one school rarely proclaims and uses all sutras within it as this would cause a lot of confusion and conflict. for example the pure land school sutras talk about how one can go to amitabha's pure land after death and reach enlightenment there by having faith in him, whereas other mahayana sutras talk more about self effort and direct practice to get oneself to nirvana in this life as opposed to the next or some kind of pure land, the lotus sutra proclaims itself the ultimate and highest sutra and so on. if you tried to practice all the mahayana sutras teachings you would end up in hundreds of knots. the pali canon is more or less internally consistent.
i do not know of a single practice found in zen, aside from koan, that is not found in theravada (and some would argue that there are things similar to koan in theravada as well). however there are many practices found in theravada that are not found in zen.
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
There is a bunch of generalizations and inaccuracies in the above, but even the most accurate description is unlikely to convey what it means to practice Zen. Instead we will project our preconceived notions onto it.
I found Zen to be neither abstract nor relying on concepts.
Mindlessness rather than mindfulness is more common in Zen.
Nature and any sort of oneness are not what it's really about.
Words and descriptions don't get close, if you really want to find out, practice each (Zen and Theravada) intensively for at least several years each. Then there is at least a hope but no guarantee. As a friend who has practiced alongside with me for at least 8 years now and done many retreats recently said, "I don't get it at all." I guess some of it has to with being ready to let go...
I found Zen to be neither abstract nor relying on concepts.
Mindlessness rather than mindfulness is more common in Zen.
Nature and any sort of oneness are not what it's really about.
Words and descriptions don't get close, if you really want to find out, practice each (Zen and Theravada) intensively for at least several years each. Then there is at least a hope but no guarantee. As a friend who has practiced alongside with me for at least 8 years now and done many retreats recently said, "I don't get it at all." I guess some of it has to with being ready to let go...
_/|\_
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
But, of course, it really depends upon how you define these two terms. Quite franly, once that is done, they end up pointing to the same sort of experience.Dan74 wrote: Mindlessness rather than mindfulness is more common in Zen.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Thanks for your comments, Dan, and for the comments you made on this thread, which I found very useful:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p211749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mike
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p211749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mike
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Thanks, Mike! I try to share little that I've understood but in all honesty I am sure it is riddled with errors and I sometimes fear it will hinder more than help.mikenz66 wrote:Thanks for your comments, Dan, and for the comments you made on this thread, which I found very useful:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p211749" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Mike
You are very likely correct, but the approach seems quite different - there seems to be more instructions on dropping mind than in using it for concentration.tiltbillings wrote:But, of course, it really depends upon how you define these two terms. Quite franly, once that is done, they end up pointing to the same sort of experience.Dan74 wrote: Mindlessness rather than mindfulness is more common in Zen.
_/|\_
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
What are doing when the "mind is dropped."Dan74 wrote: You are very likely correct, but the approach seems quite different - there seems to be more instructions on dropping mind than in using it for concentration.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
-
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 10:49 pm
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
I believe that in Theravada Prajnaparamita-sutra is not used as one of the main authorities for the meditation? Please correct if I am wrong.
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Nothing especially. What arises, arises.tiltbillings wrote:What are doing when the "mind is dropped."Dan74 wrote: You are very likely correct, but the approach seems quite different - there seems to be more instructions on dropping mind than in using it for concentration.
_/|\_
- Sambojjhanga
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
- Location: San Diego, California, USA
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
I think this is well-said. There is no way one can really get a handle on either schools without practice.Dan74 wrote: Words and descriptions don't get close, if you really want to find out, practice each (Zen and Theravada) intensively for at least several years each. Then there is at least a hope but no guarantee. As a friend who has practiced alongside with me for at least 8 years now and done many retreats recently said, "I don't get it at all." I guess some of it has to with being ready to let go...
My primarly practice now is Anapanasati. I simply observe breathing. To those of you who have a Zen practice, is there an equivalent style in Zen, or is Zen primarily "just sitting"?
Metta
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Google on Dogen and the Soto Zen.... shikantaza... is there an equivalent style in Zen, or is Zen primarily "just sitting"?
- Sambojjhanga
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
- Location: San Diego, California, USA
Re: how does zen differ from theravada?
Fascinating, thank you.plwk wrote:Google on Dogen and the Soto Zen.... shikantaza... is there an equivalent style in Zen, or is Zen primarily "just sitting"?
Metta
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors